toadworrier
No bio...
User ID: 1151
toadworrier
1yr ago
No, he can simply withdraw from India and leave that money on the table. This is what Google eventually did in China, and was better for it.
This is terribly sad for India - not because it needs Twitter, but because it needs free speech. But the Indians are going to have to learn that the hard way (and they will only do it very slowly, I'd say two centuries minimum).
toadworrier
1yr ago
Orthogonality Thesis: This is the statement that the ability of an agent to achieve goals in the world is largely separate from the actual goals it has.
This assumes that intelligent agents have goals that are more fundamental than value, which is the opposite of how every other intelligent or quasi intelligent system behaves. It's probably also impossible, in order to be smart -- calculate out all those possible paths to your goal -- you need value judgements of what rabbit tracks to chase.
This is with EY is wrong to assume that as soon as a device gets smart enough, all the "alignment" work from dumber devices will be wasted. That only makes sense that what is conserved is a goal, and now it has more sneaky ways of getting to that goal. But you'd have to go out of your way to design a thing like that.
Consistent Agents are Utilitarian: If you have an agent taking actions in the world and having preferences about the future states of the world, that agent must be utilitarian,
So is Eliezer calling me a utilitarian?
Your heading talks about consistent agents, but the premise that follows says nothing about consistency. [Sorry if you are just steelmanning someone else's argument, here "you" is that steelman, not necessarily /u/JhanicManifold].
- If there is no such function V(s), then our agent is not consistent, and there are cycles we can find in its preference ordering, so it prefers state A to B, B to C, and C to A, which is a pretty stupid thing for an agent to do.
There's no reason even why a preference ordering has to exist. Almost any preference pair you can think about (e.g. choclate vs. strawberry icecream) is radically contextual.
toadworrier
1yr ago
I think we are talking about the kind of undergrad exam where you have you have to evaluate a bunch of fairly difficult but still turn-the-crank type integrals and also some fairly easy ODEs.
toadworrier
1yr ago
So I don't think things will change.
Courts around the western world have been remarkably deferential to this nonsense. And the US courts are (uncharacteristically) more timid and deferential than those in other common-law countries. This is driven in part by a progressive belief in an activist, technocratic state and in part by conservative distrust of judicial activism.
Conservative jurists seem to be slowly coming to their senses. And ithelps good if there is a broader groundswell to support them. I'm glad to see your post -- it's part of that groundswell. But don't be too disheartened - there's incremental progress to be made, and you are helping.
toadworrier
1yr ago
At a guess, it's associated with working class communists. All two of them.
To their credit, the 19th century left ran a lot of educational programs for working men, and so their genuinely was a large cohort of working class people who understood and believed in socialist theory. But their main representative was the Labour party. The Communists must always have been the extremist fringe of the movement.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Yeah, I have no idea what the real law of the land is. Ask the real lawyers.
The point is that the 1987 decision upthread is clearly not some activist reach inventing constitutional rules out of whole cloth.
toadworrier
1yr ago
A procedural tar-pit.
The procedural rules are put in place precisely because the bare words of the constitution would allow that kind of shit you name. This is why people pay attention to precedent.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Do you think "Trump Banged Pornstar (at least) Once" is really a secret worth paying millions to keep? I'm half surprised he didn't pay her to make a movie about the incident.
toadworrier
1yr ago
but I find it irksome that there are any remaining novel theories to be had in criminal law
Welcome to complex systems. Evolution's a bitch.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Ah yes 1987... a year of great constitutional import when many questions about state and federal powers were resolved via a grand constitutional convention /sarc.
Section 2 of Article IV of the US Constitution (https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript#4) says
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.
A plain-and-simple reading of that seems to agree that the Florida can't refuse the extradition. But there will be centuries case law working out the precise procedural details of how it has to happen. Apparently in 1987 one of the corner-cases got tweaked.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Yes, how is it that the US has fixed interest loans as the norm? Is there some sort if regulation enforcing it?
Here in Australia, most people get variable rate. And even a "fixed" rate is fixed only for a small number of years.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Thanks.
I'd like to say I'm going to read and absorb your links, but we'll see if I get time.
Oh wow, this is wonderful. Sorry I didn't see it when you posted it.
I'll confirm it's 100% true. We are made to be twisted around the little fingers of our daughters.
toadworrier
1yr ago
It's just a guess. So yes, idle theory.
toadworrier
1yr ago
An important question is whether the supreme leadership in China permitted this [gain of function research].
The supreme leadership probably thought they were supporting a bioweapons research program and conning the Americans into helping. Turned out they were sort of right, just not in the way they expected.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Can someone spell out how this falsification works? Do we actually understand how LLMs parse things? Or if you don't think they parse, then does anyone know what the hell they do instead?
As far as I know, the argument goes something like, attention mechanism, context matters, yada yada. Which doesn't really cut it.
toadworrier
1yr ago
I expect there is, and I don't know how that affects Amazon's behaviour. That's a generalized thing though. Distinct from "some specific lawyers are going to sue us unless we do this specific thing".
toadworrier
1yr ago
I don't know whether or not they scan Kindle's actively for sideloaded stuff. But there is probably specific pressure to go after you.
I think in the case above, Amazon wasn't acting out of a general programme to enforce copyright, they were reacting to someone with laywer who was upset about a particular e-Book that they had actively distributed.
toadworrier
1yr ago
I don't think you said anything wrong. What was the worry?
toadworrier
1yr ago
So the best strategy is to start from a low base.
toadworrier
1yr ago
In one of history's little winks almost the first book this happened to was 1984.
Some copyright SNAFU meant that Amazon had distributed the thing when it wasn't allowed to, so they disappeared it off people's Kindles. This wasn't an attempt at censorship, other editions were readily available, but it was a clear case of memory-holing.
toadworrier
1yr ago
Me.
Institutions matter.
toadworrier
1yr ago
There's a strong history of contact between real Buddhism and German Idealism. Schopenhauer is the most well known of the lot to be influenced by Buddhism. Less well known are the various Germans who just went to Asia, became monks and never came back. Many great works of scholarly Buddhism were written by this sort of monk.
The point is there is a very deep continuum between Buddhism as traditionally practice and the stuff that goes on in corporate mindfulness trainings in the West. The core of Buddhsm always has been a particular lineage of meditation teachings. Anyone seriously investigating those teachings seriously is a Buddhist; whatever the particular cultural-religious penumbra he surrounds it with.
Functions have domains. The real world is not like that, context is only understood (if at all) after the fact. And machines (including brains) simply do what they do in response to the real world. It's only sometimes that we can tell stories about those actions in terms of preference orderings or utility functions.
More options
Context Copy link